Originally posted by phatmonky
On what ground will you charge him with war crimes??
Invading a sovereign nation without provocation.
I think not. This is the point of the WMD claims controversy. This was our legal reason to attack.The war is legal, even if it's simply based on the fact that it can be considered a continuation of the first gulf war (due to the lack of criteria met for a continuance of the cease fire).
Where did they find the other 450,000 Iraqis - again, based on the Pentagons own numbers at the wars end? How much do you think was found at sites where bunker busters were used? Could the numbers be played down now for political reasons…as is done in every war? Case in point about war lies; remember the oh so successful patriot missiles from Gulf I that really didn't work?Just over 500 Americans, and about 10-15,000 Iraqis.
It was shock and awe alright! They were sure proud of their big bombs weren't they?
He is the commander and chief. He apparently misrepresented the evidence in order to foster support for the war; this based on the latest testimony from the CIA to congress. He forced this war on the entire world and now he wants to place the blame elsewhere. I didn't trust the reasons for the war because it was Bush. Now it seems that my instincts and opinions were correct. Unfortunately I also agree with Njorl; what I would like to see and what will happen are two very different things. Still, we have seen at least one president go down for less.I still support the war, but if false evidence was use, I fully support reprecussions to the link in the chain that caused it. However I'm not sitting here just looking for an excuse to blame Bush :)